BILL ANALYSIS C.S.H.B. 2651 By: Dukes 4-11-95 Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND According to Section 361.502, Health and Safety Code, it is the policy of the state to reduce pollution at its source and to minimize the impact of pollution in order to reduce risk to public health and the environment and continue to enhance the quality of air, land and waters of the state where feasible. Source reduction is the primary goal of the state in implementing this policy. When pollutants cannot be reduced at the source, waste minimization becomes the secondary preference. Currently, all large quantity generators of hazardous waste and those generators exceeding specified levels are required to prepare a source reduction and waste minimization plan. The plan must contain a separate component addressing source reduction activities and a separate component addressing waste minimization activities. The plan includes a prioritized list of economically and technologically feasible source reduction and waste minimization projects. Some businesses feel that there may be technical or economic limits to achieving state policies. In some cases additional reductions or minimizations are cost prohibitive. In fact, the costs associated with recycling, reuse, treatment or disposal of waste may be significantly less than the costs of retrofitting, redesigning, or altering a process or facility. PURPOSE HB 2651 provides businesses with an opportunity to achieve compliance with the Texas Clean Air Act in a cost effective manner. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency or institution. SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS SECTION 1: Amends Section 361.505, Health and Safety Code, by creating a new subsection (f) which provides for compliance with the Texas Clean Air Act by allowing a person to be in compliance by showing that recycling, reuse, treatment or disposal achieves the greatest cost-benefit in lieu of further source reduction and waste minimization. Stipulates that this subsection does not alter or replace the requirements of Subsection (a) of this section, but is intended to create an additional option. SECTION 2: Effective date: September 1, 1995. SECTION 3: Emergency clause. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE The committee substitute for HB 2651 adds the stipulation that subsection (f) does not alter or replace the requirements of subsection (a) Sec. 361.505, but is intended to create an additional option. This stipulation was not in the original bill. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION HB 2651 was considered by the House Committee on Environmental Regulation in a public hearing on April 4, 1995. The committee considered a complete substitute for HB 2651. The following persons testified in favor of the bill: Paul Seals, attorney, representing himself Jeff Civens, attorney, representing himself and clients in general. Ken Kramer, representing Sierra Club, testified neutrally on the bill. Without objection the substitute was withdrawn, and HB 2651 was left pending business. HB 2651 was considered by the House Committee on Environmental Regulation in a public hearing on April 11, 1995. The committee considered a complete substitute for HB 2651. One amendment was offered to the substitute. Without objection, the amendment was adopted. The substitute, as amended, was adopted without objection. The chair directed the staff to incorporate the amendment into the substitute. HB 2651 was reported favorably as substituted with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed by a record vote of eight (8) ayes, no (0) nays, one (1) pnv, and no (0) absent.